Gillon McLachlan tells senators he had previously had his office contact then prime minister Abbott’s office over visa for ‘friend of a friend’. This blog is now closed. You can read our full report here

Updated

Peter Dutton is the focus of the Senate committee inquiry on Wednesday.
Photograph: Dave Hunt/AAP

Just before I say goodbye for the day, there’s been quite a bit of reaction to today’s hearings on social media. Particularly, surprise surprise, about the entry of a new line of questioning into the mix. Namely, what’s the go with the Argentinian polo player?

Samantha Maiden (@samanthamaiden)

Polo. Bingo. The business visa the AFL chief interviews for was for a polo player. He was an Argentine polo player. Labor said this all along. So Libs intervened for an au pair and a polo player. Which does look at little 🤔 pic.twitter.com/6vp2zVtG4h

Who among us hasn't done a favour for their au pair or a visiting polo player at some stage? Do you expect that I should neglect to visit a kindness upon my butler, hallboy or scullery maid were they to similarly fall foul of the authorities?!

In summary

So, after a slow start things got pretty interesting in the afternoon. Here’s what we learned after after about five hours of hearings.

In 2014 AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan previously asked an employee, former Liberal party staffer Jude Donnelly, to make inquiries about the visa of “a friend of a friend”, an Argentine polo player who was seeking to come to Australia.

Donnelly contacted someone within the office of then prime minister Tony Abbott and heard back within a few days.

McLachlan believed the visa had already been approved when Donnelly contacted Abbott, but wasn’t certain.

On the 2015 case, in which Peter Dutton intervened, McLachlan rejected the suggestion that without his help the au pair would’ve been deported.

Eve Watts, a senior migration consultant from Inclusive Migration Australia, told the committee she had a client who received a ministerial intervention. The client had previously been involved in the campaign of Liberal party MP Andrew Hastie. She didn’t say whether she believed that influenced the intervention.

She had another case in which a client was able to contact another Liberal party MP, Ben Morton, through community contacts. That person also received a ministerial intervention.

Earlier, the secretary of the Department of Home Affairs, Michael Pezzullo confirmed the leaking of emails about Dutton’s intervention have been referred to the Australian federal police.

That will just about do me for the day. My colleague Paul Karp will have a wrap up of everything we’ve heard today soon! Thanks for following along.

Abetz asks McLachlan whether the visa of the Argentinian polo player had already been approved before his intervention.

McLachlan says that’s “broadly my understanding”.

I don’t know the ins and outs I was asked to make an inquiry [and] the advice I got was that it had already been processed. that’s my understanding without having full understanding of all the details.

AFL boss approached Tony Abbott's office for Argentine polo player

Well. I just took a deep breath. Murray Watt asks McLachlan whether the Adelaide case is the only time he’s approached the government about a visa.

Not exactly, apparently.

McLachlan reveals that in March 2014, before Peter Dutton was the immigration minister, he was contacted by a “friend of a friend” who was seeking to come to Australia on a business visa. McLachlan asked Donnelly to contact someone in the government to see what was happening with the visa.

I was contacted by someone who was waiting on a business visa, a friend of a friend, who was wanting to come into the country who had language issues. I asked Ms Donnelly whether the visa had been approved or not asked her to find out status of the application.

Who was the minister at the time, Watt helpfully asks.

It was Scott Morrison.

Donnelly says she contacted someone with the then prime minister’s office (the PM was Tony Abbott) and heard an answer “within a couple of days”.

“I believe this guy was waiting on a business visa [and I asked] could you let me know the status of where it’s at. Sometime later I heard back it had already been processed.”

It’s a normal relationship I would have with a minister on either side of politics. He was for a brief period of time the sports minister and I think I’ve probably met minister Dutton half-a-dozen times. I have recollections of formally and informally meeting three times so I know him in a way that is as described.

[I recall] once meeting with him in his office in Brisbane when sports minister. I also have recollection of speaking to him at a friends of parliament drinks at Parliament House and also saying G’day to him at a grand final one year. Those are the three I can recall.

Just back to that earlier post about Eve Watts, a senior migration consultant from Inclusive Migration Australia, mentioning a client who had successfully obtained a ministerial intervention.

The individual, she said, had worked in some capacity on the campaign of Liberal Party MP Andrew Hastie. It’s unclear whether that was a formal position or as a volunteer. She was later asked whether that person believed it was his relationship with the Hastie campaign that secured the ministerial intervention, but didn’t give a clear answer.

A lot of the concern from the migration experts appearing at the moment relates to the way ministerial interventions are rejected. All three of the witnesses have described putting in weeks of work compiling cases in favour of intervention, only to receive a one-line rejection letter a few weeks or months later without any explanation.

It paints a picture of the way interventions generally work which seems far removed from the details of the two au pair cases.